Recommended Posts

The law of adoption was a ritual practiced in Latter Day Saint temples between 1846 and 1894 in which men who held the priesthood were sealed in a father–son relationship to other men who were not part of nor even distantly related to their immediate nuclear family.

 

Placed in abeyance

 

In a church general conference address on 8 April 1894, Wilford Woodruff stated that "I have not felt satisfied, nor has any man since the Prophet Joseph Smith who has attended to the ordinance of adoption in the temples of our God. We have felt there was more to be revealed on this subject than we have received … and the duty that I want every man who presides over a Temple to see performed from this day henceforth, unless the Lord Almighty commands otherwise, is let every man be adopted to his father."

 

Thus, as of 1894, the practice of the law of adoption ceased in the LDS Church.

 

Significance today

 

There is no evidence to suggest that homosexual sex was involved as part of the original practice of the law of adoption in the 19th century. However, beginning in the 1970s, some members of Affirmation: Gay and Lesbian Mormons began to suggest that the leadership of the LDS Church should restore the law of adoption in order to allow same-sex couples to be sealed to each other in the temple in a kind of quasi-celestial marriage. It has been argued that this would preserve the primacy of heterosexual marriage but would allow an ecclesiastical equivalent of homosexual civil unions—a homosexual ecclesiastical union. The LDS Church did not respond directly to these suggestions, but continues to oppose homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage.

 

The restoration of the law of adoption was implemented when some members of Affirmation in 1985 established the Restoration Church of Jesus Christ (commonly referred to as the "Gay Mormon Church") and the First Presidency of that church restored the law of adoption, citing it as the theological justification for their practice of homosexual celestial marriage. (source)

 

***

OK, this is something I hadn't heard of before. Well, I'd heard of the Law of Adoption but not that it had/is being pushed as a type of civil union. Obviously that was not the original intent. Any thoughts on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law of adoption was a ritual practiced in Latter Day Saint temples between 1846 and 1894 in which men who held the priesthood were sealed in a father–son relationship to other men who were not part of nor even distantly related to their immediate nuclear family.

 

Placed in abeyance

 

In a church general conference address on 8 April 1894, Wilford Woodruff stated that "I have not felt satisfied, nor has any man since the Prophet Joseph Smith who has attended to the ordinance of adoption in the temples of our God. We have felt there was more to be revealed on this subject than we have received … and the duty that I want every man who presides over a Temple to see performed from this day henceforth, unless the Lord Almighty commands otherwise, is let every man be adopted to his father."

 

Thus, as of 1894, the practice of the law of adoption ceased in the LDS Church.

 

Significance today

 

There is no evidence to suggest that homosexual sex was involved as part of the original practice of the law of adoption in the 19th century. However, beginning in the 1970s, some members of Affirmation: Gay and Lesbian Mormons began to suggest that the leadership of the LDS Church should restore the law of adoption in order to allow same-sex couples to be sealed to each other in the temple in a kind of quasi-celestial marriage. It has been argued that this would preserve the primacy of heterosexual marriage but would allow an ecclesiastical equivalent of homosexual civil unions—a homosexual ecclesiastical union. The LDS Church did not respond directly to these suggestions, but continues to oppose homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage.

 

The restoration of the law of adoption was implemented when some members of Affirmation in 1985 established the Restoration Church of Jesus Christ (commonly referred to as the "Gay Mormon Church") and the First Presidency of that church restored the law of adoption, citing it as the theological justification for their practice of homosexual celestial marriage. (source)

 

***

OK, this is something I hadn't heard of before. Well, I'd heard of the Law of Adoption but not that it had/is being pushed as a type of civil union. Obviously that was not the original intent. Any thoughts on this?

sounds like a similar version of the hullabaloo about some document that was found in early christian times that had a couple guys holding hands.

they are looking for excuses, technical loopholes and etc. with incomplete understanding.

Sealing is not only for husbands and wives, but for bringing the whole family of God together as one, and being returned to God as one whole unity.

Adoption has nothing to do with being granted sexual relation allowance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A. Wikipedia is hardly a good primary source of information.

 

B. As with many things, in order to re-instate or cling to practices of the early church that were discontinued, one must reject the legitimacy of the prophet(s) who discontinued them. A la Pres. Woodruff's clear indication of the revelatory nature of the change:

 

from FairMormon:

 

President Woodruff then announced to the General Conference and particularly to the presidents of the four temples in Utah that he had gone "before the Lord" to know who he should be adopted to and that the "Spirit of God" instructed him that he should be sealed to his natural father. Prior to this time it had been the practice to be sealed to the "prophets and apostles" in the Church. President Woodruff now pronounced the prior practice an incorrect procedure and called upon the membership of the church to accept as a revelation this announcement, which incidentally he had previously presented to his counselors and to the Quorum of Twelve Apostles.

 

Rejection of the change to the law of adoption as incorrect is about on par with rejection of the discontinuation of polygamy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as a priesthood only ordinance it doesn't help women

 

Not to accidentally give fuel to any evil flames...but...I'd be interested to see if this could be backed up beyond wikipedia's say so. In other words, I'd be hard pressed to believe that not a single sealing, of the myriads of crazy ones done back in the early days of the church before they worked it all out, was an "adoption" sealing of women, say as perhaps sisters? Not saying there was...just skeptical that there definitely wasn't. :) Moreover, if the now defunct "gay Mormon church" was willing to take on their own interpretation of how things worked, not only is it possible, but also likely that they would have simply given women the priesthood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to accidentally give fuel to any evil flames...but...I'd be interested to see if this could be backed up beyond wikipedia's say so. In other words, I'd be hard pressed to believe that not a single sealing, of the myriads of crazy ones done back in the early days of the church before they worked it all out, was an "adoption" sealing of women, say as perhaps sisters? Not saying there was...just skeptical that there definitely wasn't. :) Moreover, if the now defunct "gay Mormon church" was willing to take on their own interpretation of how things worked, not only is it possible, but also likely that they would have simply given women the priesthood.

 

like I say, I had heard of the ordinance but not that it was being pushed as part of an agenda. I think your suggestion to ordain women (where have I heard that before) would go a long way to forwarding that agenda ;):D

Edited by Average Joe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rejection of the change to the law of adoption as incorrect is about on par with rejection of the discontinuation of polygamy.

 

Which probably explains why the Restoration Church (per Wikipedia) did at least a couple of polygamous, gay sealings.  ;)

 

If Affirmation is claiming that the Restoration Church's sealings were divinely authorized, then they're kind of undermining their own argument as to why the mainline LDS church must change.  They don't need the institutional LDS church--they just need a couple of disaffected-but-formerly-duly-ordained priesthood holders to start up a new organization; and they can then draw on the LDS Church's scripture, liturgical rites, and historical traditions at will.

 

Which begs the question:  What do they still want with u$?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very sad but I'm not surprised that the movement above misunderstands the Law of Adoption as even Brigham Young didn't understand it either.

In the Joseph Smith History (1:39) we have Moroni quoting the text of Malachi to Joseph but changing the words slightly to say, “And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers. If it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming.” (JS-H: 1:39)

The law wasn't that you were sealed to some to a man in a father son relationship but that you, like Abraham, have planted within you and then seek out and obtain the promises made to 'The Fathers'. It wasn't a linkup to your own dead who after all are in need of you, rather it was a linkup to those Father's who were worthy and who are already saved. It is welding a direct link between you and them bypassing all of those generations between you to where you are adopted directly into the Family of God.

I feel very inadequate to explain it to others having only come to an understanding of it myself but I know of someone who explains it very well and with great simplicity by use of the scriptures.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share